Comparison 3. Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Caesarean section	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.64 [0.34, 1.22]
1.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.64 [0.34, 1.22]
2 Oxytocin augmentation	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.90 [0.66, 1.24]
2.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.90 [0.66, 1.24]
3 Epidural analgesia	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.96 [0.61, 1.49]
3.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.96 [0.61, 1.49]
4 Instrumental vaginal birth	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.68 [0.89, 3.14]
4.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.68 [0.89, 3.14]
5 Apgar score less than seven at five minutes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
5.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
6 Neonatal intensive care unit admission	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.03, 3.12]
6.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.03, 3.12]
7 Postpartum bleeding > 500 mL	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.32 [0.47, 3.67]
7.1 Acupuncture versus sweeping of fetal membranes	1	207	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.32 [0.47, 3.67]